Creationist Wisdom #743: Bible Is Never Wrong

Today’s letter-to-the-editor — like the last one we wrote about in #742: Unbelief Is Dangerous — appears in an unnamed newspaper at the Sauk Valley website from Sterling, Illinois. It’s titled Life without God’s word has no point, and they have a comments section.

Because the writer isn’t a politician, preacher, or other public figure, we won’t embarrass or promote her by using her full name. We think she lectures on quilting, but that doesn’t qualify for full name treatment. Her first name is Nancy. Excerpts from her letter will be enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary and some bold font for emphasis. Here we go!

I would like to respectfully respond to George Welty’s comments, “Literal belief in Bible is dangerous,” which appeared Jan. 7 in The Reader’s Voice.

She’s talking about Literal belief in Bible is ‘dangerous’, which also inspired the earlier letter we wrote about. Nancy says:

Mr. Welty claims in so many words that the Bible is a book of lies. God replies to that in the book of Hebrews, chapter 6, verse 18, where he says it is impossible for him to lie. I didn’t say it – God did!

Now that’s a rock-solid rebuttal. Well done, Nancy! Then she says:

This literal belief is far from dangerous, as George says. It is comforting for the soul.

That’s important. You don’t want an uncomfortable soul. After that she tells us:

He [the earlier letter-writer] claims the Bible is incorrect, absurd, full of errors, contradictions and impossibilities and that today’s way of looking at the scripture is much different. God says in Malachi 3:6, “For I, the Lord, do not change,” so are we to follow in his ways, or should we expect God to change his ways according to what we want?

Nancy has all the answers! She continues:

Mr. Welty claims that “science disagrees with the Bible” and that it is all fiction and forgeries. He’s been reading other books written by like-minded people, and he believes their beliefs supersede God’s.

That man is obviously a fool! Nancy rips him apart:

Should we believe the uninformed and misguided word of mortal men, or believe the trusted words of our creator God?

This is great! Let’s read on:

Satan loves to be a “divider,” especially when it comes to God’s word. Satan knows God’s word is powerful and right, but Satan wants any glory that God deserves.

Satan is bad! Another excerpt:

When you carry the Bible, Satan has a headache. When you open it, he collapses. When he sees you reading it, he loses his strength, and when you stand on the world of God, Satan can’t hurt you.

That’s good to know. And now we come to the end:

Life without God and his word, the Holy Bible, is like an unsharpened pencil. It has no point!

Listen to Nancy, dear reader. It’s not too late to salvage your pointless life.

Copyright © 2017. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

21 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #743: Bible Is Never Wrong

  1. With all the folks like Nancy wandering around with their bibles open, it’s a wonder they still worry about Satan. According to Nancy, he should have collapsed long ago.

  2. “…he says it is impossible for him to lie. I didn’t say it – God did!
    And Nancy was there to take down this dictation! You better believe that too.

  3. I can see how “Mr. Welty”‘s letter might have ruffled some feathers. However, I suggest Nancy would be well served if she would at least read her bible – including the uncomfortable parts – before she dismisses Welty out-of-hand. I’m willing to bet there are a few bits that even Nancy will find difficult to accept.

  4. Well, there are those troubling verses about being a good slave and stoning but I guess it’s all good in Nancy’s eyes.

  5. That was an awesome letter. I pictured the same writhing and frothing as the hamster.

  6. When God says something, it is by definition not a lie.
    It goes like this: when God kills someone, it is not murder; when God takes someone’s property, it is not theft.
    To made an analogy with mere human actions, if we mislead someone about a fact, if that person has no right to the facts, it is not a lie. It is not a lie to tell the Gestapo that you are not protecting Jews. But, because of the sin of Adam, we are guilty beyond Gestapo-like sin, and cannot demand any sort of thing from God.
    If we take a dangerous toy from a child, that is not theft, so too with God’s word to us.

  7. Michael Fugate

    Long on assertion, short on evidence.

  8. What TomS said is the most off-based thing I’ve read in a long, long time.

    Here’s why: His analogy fails. If we mislead someone about a fact, it is still a lie! So what if that person “has no right to the facts”? It’s still a lie.

    An example of “god” misleading someone is in 1 Samuel 16:1 – 5. He told samuel to give a false reason for his trip. The real reason was for Samuel to anoint a new king. Samuel was told to not admit that, but just to say that he was sacrificing a heifer, which he does. A “lie of omission”.

    In a court of law, you would be nailed for that. You are supposed to tell the “truth, the WHOLE truth, and nothing but the truth”

    Ironically, the “so help me god” part is optional. That other stuff is not.

    Yet apologists pretend that their god is the source of truth, or justification of truth, whatever.

    “When god says something, it is by definition not a lie”?
    Is that how you excuse it? No matter what your god does, even if it’s a war crime by humans it’s not wrong when biblegod does it?

    No wonder he’s “sinless”!

    And for us to be held accountable for something that our alleged ancestor did, is just bloody stupid! We had no choice in that, and besides: How could “eve” and “adam” know that eating of the fruit of knowledge of good and evil was wrong until after they ate of it?

  9. I think TomS was being ironic.

  10. Nancy says, “[H]e says it is impossible for him to lie. I didn’t say it – God did!”

    Nancy is reading either carelessly or dishonestly. God didn’t utter Hebrews 6:18 using the pronoun “I”; the author of the book writes the words about him in the third person. “So that by two unchangeable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled for refuge might have strong encouragement to hold fast to the hope set before us.”

    The two unchangeable things the text refers to are God’s counsel and his oath. God gives his counsel and swears to the truth of it on the authority of himself because there is none greater to swear by.

    This the old circular logic: we know the Bible is God’s word because it says it is, and we know God’s word is true because the Bible says so.

  11. Talk Origins links the Creationist Wiki rebuttal to its many truths. Their inerrancy and literal bible arguments, and an arkload of misinformation on radiometric dating, await you if you have the intestinal fortitude.

  12. and when you stand on the world of God, Satan can’t hurt you.

    Is this to mean I can use the bible as a foot rest?

  13. So if Nancy’s daughter gets raped and the rapist says he wants to marry her Nancy is totally OK with it.

  14. “when you stand on the world of God, Satan can’t hurt you.”
    These many years I have been wasting my time standing in a pentagram whenever I feared Satan was near!
    I don’t have a Bible big enough to stand on, but perhaps it would be OK to stand on two, one for each foot? But then, I can go one better! I fix a Bible to the bottom of each shoe, then I should have daylong protection, even when walking. I still need to worry about the night though. Maybe prop up my bed with a Bible at each corner?

  15. Is that supposed to be “on the word of God?
    In any case, what about the case of Job?

  16. I believe that people like DeVoss, the incoming secretary of education, who will institute an aggressive system of taxpayer funding for private and church schooling will create more of the type of person who wrote this letter. In fact, DeVoss is about to be sworn in BECAUSE a majority of americans want elementary and middle/high school education that supports and props up the type of “education” that creates minds like this letter writer’s. Which is what creates the subject matter for this blog.

  17. I don’t know, but the thought occurs to me that it is far easier to supply this kind of education. Easier for the students, easier for the teachers. And it makes it easier for the advertisers and politicians to deal with the products of this kind of education. Why shouldn’t everyone be happier?

  18. Ah, Ok. Tom was being ironic. Still, I’ve run into many people who do think like that.

  19. TomS was both being ironic and pointing to an actual theological doctrine, which is a neat trick, but one based on the contrast between rarefied theology and reality – or, for that matter, common decency. Reynold Hall has encountered a form of Poe’s Law: “There is no theological argument so strange that it is not advanced by some theologians. Therefore, without obvious textual clues, it is not possible to be certain whether a theological argument is advanced seriously or ironically.”

    The theological argument goes: God is a fully righteous God, by his Will. Therefore God cannot do evil, again by his Will. (That is, he could do evil, if he willed, but he does not will that.) Since God cannot do evil, whatever God does is good.

    But aren’t we humans supposed to have the knowledge of good and evil? So when we see needless pain, loss and suffering caused by no agency of ours, are we not entitled to call that evil, and hold God to account for it? No, not at all. If we caused it, we would indeed be evil; but if God caused it (or failed to prevent it, which is morally equivalent) then it is good by definition. If you want a further explanation, God has used his universal dispensing power to turn the evil into good without changing the act itself. (Roman Catholics say he performs a similar trick with the elements of the Host.)

    See? Theodicy discovered. Only one minor flaw – the awesome disconnect with anything real. Oh, and the fact that it relies on omnipotence extending to the ability to perform paradoxes. But we already knew God could do that, see Christology. So it’s a mystery. We’ll understand it when we go to Heaven. Next question?

  20. I would also mention the Euthyphro dilemma. (see Wikipedia, is something good because God wills it, or does God will it because it is good?)
    Is something true because God says it, or does God say it because it is true?

  21. TomS makes a critical error when he says, “When God says something, it is by definition not a lie.”

    How do we know God said it, whatever it was? The mere fact that it’s in the Bible proves God said it only if God dictated the Scriptures–an assertion which remains unproven despite centuries of diligent effort, and which is very likely unprovable.